August jobs report due out Friday morning. Lots of signs, all bad. Prediction: July will be revised down.

I'm writing this Thursday night, Aug 31.  Tomorrow biden's corrupt Department of Labor will release its official "jobs report" for August.

It will also revise the report for July, as usual.

The Wall Street shill site MarketWatch says "A poll of economists by the WSJ" says they expect the report will show the economy added 170,000 jobs in August, down from 187,000 in July.

So is that good or bad?  Unless you're an economist you don't know--which is what the regime wants, because then they can tell you "awful" is great and you won't have any idea they're lying.  Cool, eh?

To get an idea how you're being lied to, back when Obozo was emperor the consensus was that because hundreds of thousands of people enter the U.S. labor market each month, the economy had to create about 235,000 new jobs every month to keep unemployment from rising.

(For young Americans, rising unemployment is always considered a bad sign for future prosperity.)

So here's MarketWatch:

The U.S. added an average 287,000 new jobs a month in the first four months of the year.

The economy was recovering from the lockdowns and bankruptcies of duh Chyna virus.  But here's the kicker:

Even the current rate of hiring is too strong for Federal Reserve officials. They want the labor market to cool off further to ease the upward pressure on wages...to regain control of inflation.

Now, if you're suffering from high summer temps, "cool off" sounds like a great thing, eh?  But in this case what it means is, MarketWatch claims some unnamed critter allegedly said what we need is fewer new jobs, cuz dat will "ease the upward pressure on wages."

Wait, haven't the Democrats always supported calls for higher wages?  "Fight for fifteen," right?  So why would they want to "ease the upward pressure on wages," eh?

Oh, I see: "...to regain control of inflation," they bleat.

See, you may have thought inflation was caused by the clueless biden regime printing hundreds of billions in paper money.  When more paper money circulates, prices rise as people bid more for the things they need or want.  

But dat beez old thinking, comrade!  Duh regime says printin' cash don' have no effect on prices.  Instead it's dat "upward pressure on wages."  And have they ever lied to you before?

SO...what does MarketWatch say is the "fix"?  Take a look:

Fed officials believe employment growth has to slow to around 75,000 to 100,000 a month.

First, let's see a person's name for this bullshit claim.

Second:  You only get *growth* if more jobs are added than are eliminated--through bankruptcies, layoffs or corporate takeovers.  If the consensus when Obozo was emperor was that the economy needed to add 235,000 jobs every month just to stay even, what would adding just 75,000 jobs per month mean, eh?

It means a shrinking economy, with more unemployed.  But the regime has rigged the game so no matter how few jobs are added, unemployment never increases.  They rigged it by throwing tens of thousands of people each month into a category called "no longer looking for work," and those people are NOT counted as "unemployed."

You probably don't believe that since doing that would so obviously be bullshit.  So do some damn research.  Even the shills at MarketWatch realize that unemployment can't logically remain unchanged when fewer jobs are added than have always been needed:

Even though hiring has slowed, there has not been an appreciable increase in unemployment.

Yeah, like...no increase at all.  Like I said: rigged.

Now: MarketWatch is a total shill site for Wall Street.  They always tell readers to buy, buy, buy stocks--which makes stock prices rise.  As part of that push, the future must always look faaaabulous...cuz if it didn't, people would expect scary times, and the stock market would drop.  

Ooohhh, can't have that, eh?  So now we get to the point of the anonymous "Federal Reserve officials" supposedly saying "Dis rate of hiring beez too strong!  We need fewer jobs!"

My guess is that the long-expected recession is just about here, meaning we'll start seeing a lot fewer jobs created.  But to keep the market up--and to help the Democrat regime win next year's elections--they need to make lower job-creation numbers look like good news.

The anonymous line from "Fed" officials is the perfect way to do that.

Here's another jewel, under the heading "August surprise:"

The August report often undercounts the number of new jobs created. Fewer businesses respond, at least immediately, to the government’s employment questionnaire since so many people are on vacation.

What the hell is that about?  It's laying the groundwork for Media excuses if the official report shows fewer jobs were created in August than the expected 170,000.

Finally (for tonight):  A month after the jobs report for the prior month, the number is always "revised" because...reasons.  And a few years ago I noticed an...interesting...pattern: when a Republican was president, the original number reported--always sneered at by the Media as weak--was revised upward.  But that revision never made the news cuz...the Media ignores "old news," eh?

By contrast, when Obozo or biden was in office, when the jobs the number first reported for the prior month--which the Media always said was great, no matter how awful--was revised, it was almost always revised downward.  But again, that revision never made the news cuz...old news, eh?

For example, analysts had expected that in June the economy would add 240,000 jobs. The number reported the first Friday in July was 209,000--a huge 13% below the estimate.  And then a month later that woefully bad number was revised downward to 185,000 jobs--a stunning 23% below the expected number.  It should have been reported as a total disaster--but I'll bet you the drink of your choice that you never heard a word about it.

SO...on August 4th the Labor Secretariat reported that in JULY 187,000 jobs were added.  So I predict that tomorrow, after the jobs number for August has been announced and reporters have stopped paying attention, biden's Bureau of Labor Statistics will quietly announce the revised figure for July.

I predict the revised figure will be 175,000.  But you won't see that figure in ANY Mainstream Media publication--because it would make biden and his faaaabulous economy--cutely named "bidenomics" by the fellating media--look like the train wreck it is.

Just for the record: 175,000 jobs is 25% fewer than the 235,000 economists said the economy had to add to keep unemployment from rising when Obozo was emperor.  Twenty-five percent lower.

But pay no attention to that, comrade:  Don't worry.  Ev'ryt'ing jus' fine.  See, dey got dat 235,000 usin' "maff," eh?  An' we lot smahtah now wif' biden an' harris, so we know maff beez raaacis'.  So don' worry, be happy!

An' be sure to buy some stock this week!  Cuz duh economy beez BOOMIN'! 

Posted to the blog at 10:10 pm eastern time. 

Source: MarketWatch

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/hiring-likely-slowed-again-last-month-but-watch-out-for-surprises-in-u-s-august-jobs-report-22911614?mod=home-page